The Escapist's General Manager and Adam Baldwin support GG, attack the entire political left

[dragoongfa]

snip

I am going to say something here and take this as you will:

Those things that Adam Baldwin complains about? The ever increasing size of the public sector, the over taxation of everyone, the demonization of any and all opposition.

Those exact things happened in Greece and you know how that song and dance ended for my country.

EDIT: And yes in interviews the Interviewee is expected to be biased and present his personal POV.

You're genuinely arguing that the USA is a case of 'ever-increasing size of public sector' and over-taxation? The polarisation isn't helped by Baldwin, and his 'suspicions' [https://twitter.com/AdamBaldwin/status/518293964571418624].

That is obviously a joke, a stupid one but still a joke. Political partisans always throw such things around. I can show you some european ones if you want a comparison in stupidity.

The US economic problems are far ranging but yes the over-extension of the public sector is a core issue of US financial troubles and is in a way a parallel with Greece before the Greek financial collapse. There have been cutbacks in some areas but they are not enough and the growth stimuli didn't not address the real issues.

As it is now the US budget deficit is monstrous and the US debt has by now surpassed the nation's GDP:

http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/unitedstates

That debt finances three big categories that should have been cut back if the US economy was to stabilize:

1st: The military spending, including the now monstrous intelligence budget.
2nd: The public sector.
3rd: The bailouts of private businesses.

The biggest problem for the US ain't the public sector but the monstrous defense budget coupled with the intelligence branches. I am a follower of various military sites and let me tell you that there are many scandals in US defense procurements that would save the US taxpayer billions if not hundreds of billions in money if there was some proper oversight.

The public sector is a somewhat distant second and I understand why a US conservative like AB would touch this one first before the big beast that is the defense budget. Still the federal budget is bloated and cut backs should have happened long ago.

Finally the bailouts. Free Market 101: When you fuck up you go bankrupt. The US government ignored this because of lobbying powers and decided to bail out several incompetent businesses. That money is now on the shoulders of the US taxpayer.

 

[Zontar]

I make no claims as to what percentage of the movement they comprise, though I will unequivocally say they were the progenitors of the movement. As for whether the issue is about ethics in games journalism, I think my answer further down in the post made it clear I think it's a red herring, albeit a red herring that many people have taken to heart as the true issue.

The answer is the vast majority, and it's in no way, shape or form a red herring. One need only look at either of the megathreads to see that beyond a reasonable doubt.

Quinns personal sex life isn't my business, it isn't your business. It isn't newsworthy. I find it interesting that you'd try to justify it because you arbitrarily decide that it's 'cheater shaming' and therefor not 'slut shaming', considering that the very definition of slut shaming is that its a process that women are attacked for not conforming to accepted codes of sexual conduct (paraphrased from wiki, if you want a source on that).

That does not change the fact that if she was a man it would have been jumped on by games media, and it's a pretty disingenuous to think that calling someone out of cheating is slut shaming. If that is in fact slut shaming, then it's a form which should be perfectly acceptable and in no way opposed due to the fact that it is a public health hazard and a a large mark of a person being untrustworthy or honest.

History revisionism at it's best. That shit was spammed across multiple sites over the course of a day. The Escapist was saturated with at least 6-12 threads, all by new posters. It was a coordinated effort to spread it as far and fast as possible. As for allegations of rape or sexual harassment being reported and this not, that's not a double standard. This was a case of someone having private relationships within the industry exposed, not a crime occuring.

I remember only 4 threads, one on different forums, and I don't remember any of them having started before the Reddit clampdown which was one of the two red flags which added the most duel to this fire (the other being 4chan). And yes it IS a double standard when you call someone a rapist on someone's word (who then admits to having lied about it in court) in character assassination, without giving any retractions when it is proven to have been slander, and then completly ignore (and go on to censor) several members of the game press having had sexual relationships which are conflicts of interest, an accusation made with stronger evidence that was on a level legally admissible in a court of law.

Saying it was a double standard is flattering because the implications.

Yes, they could have stooped to the level of tabloid gossip rag nonsense. But they didn't, and they have my respect for it. Honestly as much as I like the contributors at the Escapist, I think management did a major disservice in allowing that witch hunt to happen here. I've definitely been spending more time at places like RPS, Kotaku and Gamasutra as a result.

This part contradicts itself. You say it would have had them stoop to the level of a tabloid, but you ignore the fact that they started doing that YEARS AGO and never looked back. You complain about a witch hunt, then praise those who do them on a regular basis. You complain about the management here allowing the issue to be discussed at all, despite the fact that everyone else not doing that is the reason this is an issue at all. You talk about respect, yet you give it to those who deserve nothing but ridicule and keep it from those who have taken steps to earn it.

I'm sorry, but RPS, Kotaku and Gamasutra aren't places you want to state as being your destinations of choice for anything gaming, that's the gaming equivalent of stating you watch Fox News. They're sites run by ideologues who care not an iota for gaming, only for pushing their ideologies in a top-down attempt at unnaturally forcing change in the industry at the expense of artistic expression and basic economic understanding.

 

[MysticSlayer]

snip

I am going to say something here and take this as you will:

Those things that Adam Baldwin complains about? The ever increasing size of the public sector, the over taxation of everyone, the demonization of any and all opposition.

Those exact things happened in Greece and you know how that song and dance ended for my country.

I'm not really interested in debating the economics here (that's better suited for R&P). Despite disagreeing with their views, my point wasn't so much to demonize Baldwin and Macris but to point out that firebobm173 wasn't twisting their words. The (sometimes harsh) criticism of the left was clearly there in their discussion. And as much as they are allowed to present that viewpoint, that doesn't absolve them of criticism or mean that no one can take offense at their presentation of the left.

 

[Jux]

The answer is the vast majority, and it's in no way, shape or form a red herring. One need only look at either of the megathreads to see that beyond a reasonable doubt.

If you say so. Usually I ask for reasoning, or sources, but if you're going to direct me to that echo chamber, frankly it's not even worth my time arguing about.

That does not change the fact that if she was a man it would have been jumped on by games media,

Do we have any real examples of this?

and it's a pretty disingenuous to think that calling someone out of cheating is slut shaming. If that is in fact slut shaming, then it's a form which should be perfectly acceptable and in no way opposed due to the fact that it is a public health hazard and a a large mark of a person being untrustworthy or honest.

Sorry, don't buy it. If Eron thought he had picked up an STI, he could have gotten tested, and told Quinn that she should get tested. It's not in the publics best interest to know the dirty details of a persons private life. As for being trustworthy or honest, I have two things to say there. To the vast majority of people, it shouldn't matter if Quinn cheated, any more than it should matter if x y or z male developers cheated on their spouses (though it's funny how Quinn gets the majority of the hate here, yet whats his name that was married that slept with her I hear nothing about). Second, have you ever lied? Should I take a 'yes' as some sort of mark that you're untrustworthy?

I remember only 4 threads, one on different forums, and I don't remember any of them having started before the Reddit clampdown which was one of the two red flags which added the most duel to this fire (the other being 4chan). And yes it IS a double standard when you call someone a rapist on someone's word (who then admits to having lied about it in court) in character assassination, without giving any retractions when it is proven to have been slander, and then completly ignore (and go on to censor) several members of the game press having had sexual relationships which are conflicts of interest, an accusation made with stronger evidence that was on a level legally admissible in a court of law.

I'm not much in the habit on arguing against something that isn't sourced.

This part contradicts itself. You say it would have had them stoop to the level of a tabloid, but you ignore the fact that they started doing that YEARS AGO and never looked back.

Granted, my memory isn't perfect, but the most recent thing that Gawker did was the Hulk Hogan sex tape thing. That shouldn't have been put out there, that was pretty shitty. And while that wasn't Kotaku, it's worth mentioning because Gawker is the parent company. That aside, if you want me to believe this is a long standing problem, I'm again just going to ask for some sources.

You complain about a witch hunt, then praise those who do them on a regular basis. You complain about the management here allowing the issue to be discussed at all, despite the fact that everyone else not doing that is the reason this is an issue at all. You talk about respect, yet you give it to those who deserve nothing but ridicule and keep it from those who have taken steps to earn it.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but unless you're going to provide citations, all I can do is shrug my shoulders and ignore it.

I'm sorry, but RPS, Kotaku and Gamasutra aren't places you want to state as being your destinations of choice for anything gaming, that's the gaming equivalent of stating you watch Fox News. They're sites run by ideologues who care not an iota for gaming, only for pushing their ideologies in a top-down attempt at unnaturally forcing change in the industry at the expense of artistic expression and basic economic understanding.

An opinion which you and most gg'ers share I'd wager, but one that hasn't shown to hold water for me.

 

[dragoongfa]

snip

I am going to say something here and take this as you will:

Those things that Adam Baldwin complains about? The ever increasing size of the public sector, the over taxation of everyone, the demonization of any and all opposition.

Those exact things happened in Greece and you know how that song and dance ended for my country.

I'm not really interested in debating the economics here (that's better suited for R&P). Despite disagreeing with their views, my point wasn't so much to demonize Baldwin and Macris but to point out that firebobm173 wasn't twisting their words. The (sometimes harsh) criticism of the left was clearly there in their discussion. And as much as they are allowed to present that viewpoint, that doesn't absolve them of criticism or mean that no one can take offense at their presentation of the left.

I also added something later which came down to this:

A interview is supposed to present the bias of the interviewee, in this case Adam Baldwin is a known right wing conservative with known positions and bias. Of course he would say stuff that would reflect him as best as he could and reflect his political opposition as bad as he could.

That's political bullshit rhetoric 101.

If you want to criticize someone for his presentation of the left then criticize the one who did the talking, not the one who was asking the questions.

 

[Mikeybb]

snip

I am going to say something here and take this as you will:

Those things that Adam Baldwin complains about? The ever increasing size of the public sector, the over taxation of everyone, the demonization of any and all opposition.

Those exact things happened in Greece and you know how that song and dance ended for my country.

I'm not really interested in debating the economics here (that's better suited for R&P). Despite disagreeing with their views, my point wasn't so much to demonize Baldwin and Macris but to point out that firebobm173 wasn't twisting their words. The (sometimes harsh) criticism of the left was clearly there in their discussion. And as much as they are allowed to present that viewpoint, that doesn't absolve them of criticism or mean that no one can take offense at their presentation of the left.

That's fair enough.
Their presentation of the left, or aspects of it, can be criticized.
However, criticizing them for being right wing...
Well, that just doesn't seem fair.

I've always considered myself left.
Never voted for a conservative government in my life, always voting for the political left.
Even considering the often claimed trend that when aging a person becomes more leaning towards conservative thought patterns, I still hold to that stance.
Come the next election I'm voting in, I see nothing from my local conservative groups or other parties that has changed my stance in any way.
Additionally, according to tests I fall left with an anti authoritarian leaning.

I say the above as a qualifier to what follows.

The demonization of people for having a right wing ideology strikes me as disrespectful, dehumanizing and frankly, unfair.

I know you don't do it here, but I've seen it happen a lot.

The biggest take away I got from that article was one phrase that was quoted above.

"not evil, just wrong"

I wish that people could leave behind the invective and bile when discussing other peoples politics.

Mind you, I've wished for a lot of crazy things in my life and I've still not seen them.

 

[Random Gamer]

I've got a 20+ years voting record of picking only socialists/leftists/greens. Which, for a US audience, means people way to the left of mainstream Democrats, many being to the left of any elected Democrat. And I also think Obamacare is ridiculous - not because it's tyranny but because it's a pityful half-assed measure that barely improves the situation and doesn't address the biggest issue of for-profit insurances running the system.
Yet I don't feel specially attacked.
Archon openly acknowledges he's libertarian, so his comments are not a surprise.
I also disagree with some of their angles and disagree with some of the blame they put firmly on "the Left".
But "attacked" is quite strong and a bit far-fetched, specially if it's supposed to hurt "the entire poltiical left".

That said, I also have serious issues with the way people are worked out about "social justice", because these people usually are so focused on this side-issue they stop caring about what really matters. They just don't give a shit about economic justice and about fixing or changing the current economic system. When this is, by far, the biggest issue of all, and the one that could sink any progress you might gain in any other field, if it isn't addressed.
In fact, I actually have serious trouble considering "social justice advocates" as "Left", since I definitely don't see them spending any time fighting economic liberalism - as if ignoring it and opting for the status quo could ensure any lasting progress on any other field. So, for all I know, they're objective allies of capitalism.
So, well, right-wing people attacking what they call "SJW" doesn't even look like an attack on the real Left, most of the time; just infighting between groups that aren't on my side.

 

[Emanuele Ciriachi]

The OP post is trolling, right? Many "Social Justice" are themselves bigots - tolerants of everything... unless they happen to disagree with them. #onesideddiversity

 

[Lupine]

Everyone is entintitled to his opinion, Adam Baldwin has his own, people can agree and disagree with him.

However saying that a journalist who values objective truth is attacking and 'condemning the entire political left' because he took an interview is how can I put it?

Strawmanning?

Either that or a very damning statement on the political left.

Naw, I'm gonna go with strawmanning...

Also I feel like most people that try to label people as being on the political left or the political right, tend to not actually know where those places are in the political spetrum and instead sort of just make a lot of baseless assumptions using the most extreme voices on either end as the measuring sticks. Which would be funny if it didn't turn everything into a murky miasma of accusations that mostly ignore that most people by and large are more or less politically moderate seeing as their opinions on particular issues tend to roam from right to left and left to right just as often.

 

[MysticSlayer]

snip

I am going to say something here and take this as you will:

Those things that Adam Baldwin complains about? The ever increasing size of the public sector, the over taxation of everyone, the demonization of any and all opposition.

Those exact things happened in Greece and you know how that song and dance ended for my country.

I'm not really interested in debating the economics here (that's better suited for R&P). Despite disagreeing with their views, my point wasn't so much to demonize Baldwin and Macris but to point out that firebobm173 wasn't twisting their words. The (sometimes harsh) criticism of the left was clearly there in their discussion. And as much as they are allowed to present that viewpoint, that doesn't absolve them of criticism or mean that no one can take offense at their presentation of the left.

I also added something later which came down to this:

A interview is supposed to present the bias of the interviewee, in this case Adam Baldwin is a known right wing conservative with known positions and bias. Of course he would say stuff that would reflect him as best as he could and reflect his political opposition as bad as he could.

I saw what you added. Originally I had cut it out and planned to respond to it separately, but in the end I just used the last sentence to respond to it. Unfortunately, I forgot to add it back in, but that wasn't due to me trying to ignore it.

And I really don't mind Baldwin trying to present the left badly. Yeah, it was annoying that he used such tired arguments such as the "they only tolerate those they agree with," but he's perfectly within his rights to say what he wants, just as anyone is perfectly within their rights to disagree with him.

That's political bullshit rhetoric 101.

If you want to criticize someone for his presentation of the left then criticize the one who did the talking, not the one who was asking the questions.

Actually, Macris is the one who decided to use phrase "forces of evil" when referencing the left, which was possibly the only truly offensive part of the entire interview. He also spent a lot of time (at least in the latter half of the interview) agreeing with Baldwin and clearly prodding him to express displeasure for the left. As a result, I don't think Macris is entirely removed from opinions expressed in the interview, at least once you get further into it.

However, criticizing them for being right wing...
Well, that just doesn't seem fair.

I think that the criticism came from Baldwin's tweet about Obama wanting to bring ebola here to the U.S., and as much as I want to think it was just a really bad joke, I actually have some friends who actually do believe that, so I can't really make that assumption.

 

[Lilani]

Oh, dearie me oh my. Most days when I peek in on the off-topic forums they are full of wonderfully positive topics and insight. Other days...they look like this...

 

[Mikeybb]

However, criticizing them for being right wing...
Well, that just doesn't seem fair.

I think that the criticism came from Baldwin's tweet about Obama wanting to bring ebola here to the U.S., and as much as I want to think it was just a really bad joke, I actually have some friends who actually do believe that, so I can't really make that assumption.

True, though while I'm inclined towards the 'worse than bad joke' assumption, I don't think it's a thing he genuinely believes either.
All the same, the rest of my point stands.
"not evil, just wrong" is a good tenet to hold and far preferable to saber rattling.
Being right wing or left wing shouldn't mark you for criticism as a person, only your ideas and representation of other ideologies warrent such scrutiny.

I have a feeling you get that though based on what you said regarding your friends.

I'm not sure whether to congratulate you on having a ideologically diverse group of friends or apologize that you have to occasionally argue against that or, at least, hear it.

 

[Soleca]

Wrong thread welp.

 

[Zontar]

As for any "SJWs" who may have had some strong words for you; well that's what happens when you treat people like dirt and constantly attack them because you're too fucking stupid to realize that standing against justice makes you the bad guy.

Hey, I'm not the one who spent years putting down whole groups on a daily basis just because I bought the narrative that the groups in question had wronged me despite almost none of them ever having even been in a position to do so even if they'd wanted to.

To say nothing of what it says about you that you bought into those lies in the first place.

Again, not the one who spent years attacking other groups on a daily basis to further political ends.

I hate to break it to you, but GamerGate supporters are just another group in a long, long line of right-wing puppets being manipulated by lies for goals you don't even understand.

Now this shows you know nothing of the movement. Unlike the Anti-GamerGate movement (which is dominated and almost exclusively radical left), GamerGate is supported by a health level of those both left, right and centre. Which isn't a surprise given the fact that unlike those opposed to it there isn't a political ideology that drives it at its core.

The only one here who has bought anything is you, and it's the lie perpetuated by far-left radicals who turn even liberals away for being too right wing.

 

[Ronin1325]

Social Justice is about creating equality and ending bigotry?

Yeah, that's what social justice means. But I'm not surprised you didn't know that; right wing movements and social groups often start their campaigns of fear and hate mongering by "redefining" what these words actually mean. Hence why so few people in the unite states know what liberal means. Case and point; the founding fathers were by definition liberals. Of course the right would never say that, and have poured countless hours and millions of dollars into propaganda to link the term to anti-democratic government philosophizes that it has never had anything to do with.

As for any "SJWs" who may have had some strong words for you; well that's what happens when you treat people like dirt and constantly attack them because you're too fucking stupid to realize that standing against justice makes you the bad guy. To say nothing of what it says about you that you bought into those lies in the first place. I hate to break it to you, but GamerGate supporters are just another group in a long, long line of right-wing puppets being manipulated by lies for goals you don't even understand.

I'm glad that you're so certain of what you think you know about any of us. Gamergate isn't the one redefining words to fit their 'narrative'. Gamergate isn't the one closely associating with journalists and academics who do these kinds of things-

"So yeah. Over on The Twitters we (as in yours truly, +Ian Miles Cheong, +Brendan Keogh, +Rowan Kaiser, +Mattie Brice and +Annie Dennisdóttir Wright) started discussing our various attempts to undermine the heteronormative hegemony. And now we continue it where we don't have wordcaps."


http://pastebin.com/LAmZNVKn

Let's look at that bolded word, shall we?

Undermine

" verb (used with object), undermined, undermining.
1.
to injure or destroy by insidious activity or imperceptible stages, sometimes tending toward a sudden dramatic effect.
2.
to attack by indirect, secret, or underhand means; attempt to subvert by stealth."

Well, there we go! That's some really great integrity and desire for open, honest communication we've got going there! And how does this irrelevant, isolated, 'not important' academic paper work out in the real world?-

To avoid a wall of text, how about just this one-

https://archive.today/fHNhn

There, that's Zoya Street's version of 'integrity' and open dialogue, a Hit-Piece on Totalbiscuit, who wasn't even pro-gamergate.

I'm sorry you believe that the games journalists are fighting the good fight. They are not. We have evidence to back up our claims, all they have is shrieking rhetoric.

 

[AkaDad]

So, the people who fought for women to vote, Social Security, Medicare, ending child labor, safe workplaces, safe food, clean air and water, civil rights, interracial marriage, equal pay, and gay marriage are forces of evil.

This is why people mock Conservatives like Adam Baldwin.